Arthus Erea <[email protected]> wrote: > I'm not sure how we would have the "preview" button appear before > saving. As it is, there has to be some data in the post to preview or > the theme has nothing to look at.
As it is, there doesn't have to be any data (as the user defines data). One can already start a new post, without typing anything, hit save and preview, and see a preview of an "empty" post. Works just fine. Suppose that "preview" were always present and active. (And would display the same silly empty post that it currently does after you've "saved" nothing.) What you would gain is the additional discoverability of the button when the page is first loaded. (Small gain though it is.) The downside, though, as Arthus points out, is that it does nothing of particular value at that point, except to demonstrate its presence and expected function when data eventually gets entered. The downside might outweigh the upside even in my own eyes. I'm undecided, and leave it to those of you with actual user-experience experience. After some consideration, I might vote against my own naive idea: David wrote: > Transitioning from inactive (gray) to active instead of from invisible > to active. (I had already scanned the publish page for links and controls > before hitting > "save". I didn't know I'd have to scan the page again for a newly created > control after > hitting "save.") Since the link's style is text-decoration: none, then an "inactive (gray)" version of it might be indistinguishable from simple static text. Unless it changed its wording from "Cannot Preview Yet" to "Preview Post", then the mere subtle change from inactive to active (gray to black) would probably be missed. Why would I suspect what-I- originally-took-to-be-static-text would turn into a working link? That's probably even *more* subtle the the appearing link I was complaining about. Habari's user experience is already very well designed, and I can see the reasoning behind it. Just because I happen to have an anecdotal story about the downside of one of the tradeoffs doesn't mean that it's the *wrong* tradeoff. I appreciate that you're open to the discussion, though. Thanks, --David --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/habari-users -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
